The Millennium, Part 4

Verse 5

(Rev 20:5 ESV) The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.

This is a highly controverted passage. The text implies that the faithful were resurrected early, perhaps at the beginning of the Millennium, whereas “the rest of the dead,” surely meaning the damned, aren’t resurrected until the end of the Millennium. But it’s really hard to fit a resurrection of the saved 1,000 years before the resurrection of the damned into the rest of the Bible, which plainly teaches to the contrary.

The solution is found in thinking less literally, but not all that much less literally.

(Rom 6:3-4 ESV) 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

(Eph 2:4-5 ESV)  4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,  5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ–by grace you have been saved–

(1Pe 3:21-22 ESV) 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,  22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.

The first resurrection is, of course, the resurrection of Jesus —

(1Co 15:19-20 ESV)  19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.  20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

Notice how Paul refers to our baptism as a participation in Jesus’ resurrection. We are, again, in an in-between time, between participating in Christ’s resurrection and before enjoying our own resurrection. But if Paul can describe us in Eph 2:7 as already in heaven — and hence already resurrected in some sense, there’s a sense in which our participation in the resurrection of Christ means we’ve already enjoyed the first resurrection.

The damned, however, will also be resurrected, but their resurrection will only be at the end of this age. And that fits v. 5 very nicely.

Obviously, the fact that we’ve already been resurrected in Jesus does not mean we won’t be physically resurrected at the Second Coming. Rather, for the saved, the first resurrection anticipates and promises the second resurrection.

Verse 6

(Rev 20:6 ESV)  6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

The “second death” is the death of the resurrected damned. It’s damnation. And that pretty plainly shows that the “first resurrection” is salvation in Jesus, which is further confirmed by calling the saved “priests of God and Christ.”

(Exo 19:5-6 ESV)  5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine;  6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.”

(Isa 61:5-6 ESV)  5 Strangers shall stand and tend your flocks; foreigners shall be your plowmen and vinedressers;  6 but you shall be called the priests of the LORD; they shall speak of you as the ministers of our God; you shall eat the wealth of the nations, and in their glory you shall boast.

(Rev 1:4-6 ESV)  4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne,  5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood  6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

These ideas blend together in –

(1Pe 2:9 ESV) 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

We are not only priests, but royal priests — and “royal” means we’re both priests and kings. Now under the Law of Moses, this was quite impossible, as only Levites could be priests, and only a descendant of David, of the tribe of Judah, could be a king. But as Hebrews teaches us, Jesus was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, that is, a priest of the God Most High not from Levi.

And so, you see, we’re also kings and priests, although we’re from the wrong tribe. Most of us aren’t even Jews. Rather, we find our priesthood and kingship in Jesus.

Verses 7-10

(Rev 20:7-10 ESV)  7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison  8 and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea.  9 And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them,  10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

In the Old Testament, Gog and Magog are referenced in genealogies, but we know next to nothing about them. However, in intertestamental Judaism, Gog and Magog —

were thought of as two leaders. In apocalyptic writings writings, for example, they often symbolize the forces of evil.

Leon Morris, The Revelation of St. John, in the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. As noted earlier, the battle against Gog and Magog describes the same battle as described in chapter 19 —

(Rev 19:19-21 ESV) 19 And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies gathered to make war against him who was sitting on the horse and against his army.  20 And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur.  21 And the rest were slain by the sword that came from the mouth of him who was sitting on the horse, and all the birds were gorged with their flesh.

The battle of chapter 19, like the battle of chapter 20, ends with God’s spiritual enemies in the lake of fire and their earthly soldiers dead.

Now, there’s no reason to suppose that Gog and Magog are two humans. After all, God’s enemies in chapter 19 were the “beast” and the “false prophet.” Meanwhile, the battle of Arrmeggedon in chapter 16, God’s enemies are the dragon, the beast, the false prophet, and Babylon.

I’m sure someone has thought this through very carefully and in much greater detail, but the point seems to be that anyone at all who stands against God will be defeated, from Satan, to Rome, to idolaters, to anyone who has not shared in the first resurrection. And this will be true even if God utterly unchains Satan, because if God could chain him once, he can defeat him again. Satan will lose.

Conclusions

I make no pretense at having solved all the mysteries of the Revelation. I haven’t. But I remain firmly convinced that —

1. Premillennialism is mistaken. Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world. It isn’t like Rome and won’t be like Rome. Rome is the enemy in Revelation, and there’s no sense that God intends to defeat Rome with Roman weapons. When victories are won in Revelation, God wins them by his own power.

2. There is nothing in the Revelation that contradicts conditional immortality. Indeed, the passages clearly say that the damned will be killed. References to perpetual torture are all references to spiritual beings.

3. The 1,000-year reign is the time between the first resurrection (Jesus’ resurrection in which the saved participate) and the second (at the Second Coming). It’s going on right now. And we are kings and priests right now.

As N. T. Wright points out in After You Believe: Why Christian Character Matters, in a very different context, we are kings in Jesus who are like Jesus, that is, servant kings. We aren’t like worldly kings who demand to be served and who oppress. Rather, like Jesus, we are kings who will die for others.

(Zec 9:9 ESV)  9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

The kingship of the Kingdom is a kingship of humility.

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Revelation, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The Millennium, Part 4

  1. Laymond says:

    (Rev 20:5 ESV) The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.

    Jay you do realize we are dealing with "Revelation" here. Look at 21-8 at who all is going to "Hell"

    Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    This don't leave much room for forgiveness, does it?

  2. abasnar says:

    But although Paul is using the term resurrection when speaking of baptism, he also speaks of a resurrection in the future sense, after we have died. And the point is, that those who take part in the first resurrection, died as martyrs in persecution.

    So it does not work at all to use Rom 6 and other texts that speak of our new birth as a parrallel for Rev 20:5. It is not enogh to point to identical words used here and there, we have to keep in mind the context and the concept as well. Amilennialsm fails to do this.

    Alexander

  3. Royce Ogle says:

    Jay,

    An alternative approach to studying the Bible is to take it literally when it makes sense to do so. Context usually gives the reader the right course to take.

    The Bible says of Jesus in John 10 that He is "the door" and any sane reader knows Jesus doesn't have hinges. He is the entry way, "the way" to God. So the context dictates that "door" not be taken literally.

    In Ephesians (and elsewhere) the unsaved are described as spiritually "dead". The Bible is consistent in stating that Christians have "life" and that nonChristian remain in "death". So, when we read in Ephesians 2:1,5 and Colossians 2:13 and fail to take it literally there is tragic results.

    Those who do not take these passages literally believe that sinners only need to be baptized and improve their morals. As a result churches are populated with men and women who are moralists, good people by human standards but not born again.

    If you take the Bible literally your goal changes and you preach the gospel understanding that what the lost need is not reformation but Life. They must be quickened (made alive) by the Spirit of God. (Eph 2:5).

    The view you are taking here now makes a thousand years, not a thousand but over two thousand and counting. Respectfully, I believe you are on the wrong track here. I say this as one who is unconvinced on one millennial view over another but 1,000 years in the Bible most likely means 1,000 years in my view, I just don't know when that thousand years is.

    Regards,
    Royce

  4. abasnar says:

    1. Premillennialism is mistaken. Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world. It isn’t like Rome and won’t be like Rome. Rome is the enemy in Revelation, and there’s no sense that God intends to defeat Rome with Roman weapons. When victories are won in Revelation, God wins them by his own power.

    Which kind of weapons does Christ use in Rev 19:15?
    Did this weapons kill people literally Rev 19:21?
    How does this correspond the the battles of the Lord in the OT 2Ch 20:17-24?
    Did this result in literal deaths 2Ch 20:24?

    So why on earth can't there be a literal millenium? It's not a bibliical impossibilty, it is a philosophical prejudice!

    2. There is nothing in the Revelation that contradicts conditional immortality. Indeed, the passages clearly say that the damned will be killed. References to perpetual torture are all references to spiritual beings.

    If the the false prophet and the beast (both humans, or the human representants of systems) are being tortured day and night for thousand years, it does not sound like destruction.

    3. The 1,000-year reign is the time between the first resurrection (Jesus’ resurrection in which the saved participate) and the second (at the Second Coming). It’s going on right now. And we are kings and priests right now.

    If that is so: Where was the beast prior (!) to Christ's resurrection?
    Where are the martyrs who refused to accept the sign of the beast prior to Christ's resurrection?
    Why do the elers praise God for the FUTURE reign of the church (although they already are a royal priesthood)? Simply because we don't reign yet.

    See, Jay, this does not work. I am really deeply disappointed of this "study" of yours – I don't say this because I want to pick on you, but because I have the impression that you normally do a far better job when studying the scripture. But in this case, you just and only consulted commentaries that confirm what you want to believe – and you did not pay attention to the text, the context and the concepts.

    Maybe next time …

    Alexander

  5. Laymond says:

    Jay said; "I make no pretense at having solved all the mysteries of the Revelation. I haven’t. But I remain firmly convinced that –"

    That is the problem with reading Revelation as literal scripture. Revelation was written in such a way as to give credence to any and all beliefs if misused.

    There are many people who use John's vision to back their misguided belief that it proves Jesus and God are one and the same person. How do they do this ?
    well they claim that both "The Father' and "The Son" claim they are "the Alpha and Omega". I must admit it reads that way to me also, so I agree that both God, and Jesus claim this title, but does that mean that they both claim to be God ? No it does not, what does Alpha mean in this writing ? It simply means the first, or beginning. What does Omega mean here ? it simply means the last or end. the only time this phrase is used is in this book called Revelation, things revealed from heaven to those of us on earth.

    If a thing is referred to as the Alpha and Omega, that doesn't leave room for anything on either end or in the middle, does it, so it simply means, one of a kind.

    1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

    So it seems to me that if this reveals anything, it proves God is one of a kind, and Jesus is one of a kind
    therefore they can't possibly be the same person.
    But they both deservedly are entitled to be called "the Alpha and Omega"

    So when we use Revelation to prove a point, we need to be careful that it is in context with the rest of the scriptures.
    Although I agree with Jay, I don't believe there will be a thousand years between the resurrection of the good and evil, I would just warn against using Revelation as proof text.

  6. val says:

    Hi, there is no second death for any sinner it is a lie from the devil for Satan has deceived the whole world. I can prove it to you by the word of God at http://thegoodtale.blogspot.com/2010/04/no-hell-f

  7. Pingback: Conditional Immortality and Revelation | Conditional Immortality Blog

Comments are closed.